DailyDirt: The End of Men?

from the urls-we-dig-up dept

The battle of the sexes has been a long-term skirmish for centuries, if not millennia. There's really no winning, but there have been some recent suggestions that women are gaining ground. It's time to fight back, men! Or not. It might be better to just nod and say, "Yes, dear..."

Honestly,he presented a number of points, backed them up in a logical manner, and then told mankind to shut the hell up because certain things are just easier.

Meanwhile, at least that first rebuttal tries to argue things like "Women actually subsidize the drunk driving of men" despite the fact that men pay much higher premiums on.

Oh, and Nicole Hollander, try making any point. Any point at all. Or maybe a comic that isn't terrible.

I like to consider myself to be an open minded man, but if you want me to disagree with what Scott Adams said and, further, be angry about it, then give me a damn good reason why it's wrong and BACK IT UP WITH EVIDENCE!

Bah

Scott Adams did not "compare women to the mentally handicapped". He simply said that the strategies for dealing with both of those groups were similar for a man, in that there was no way to win the fight.

Ironically, the firestorm of indignation that resulted from his post proved his point; from the moment he started typing, there was a hand behind a keyboard getting ready to make a federal case out of every word. He literally couldn't win.

Ok then...

Re: Bah

That "firestorm of indignation" over Adams' blog makes the aggrieved seem more like Al Sharpton than Rosa Parks and actually helps make Adams' point. Men should not hit women, the mentally-handicapped or children for similar *reasons*; not that one equals another.

The "Al Sharpton" mentality ignores the obvious intent of the statement and twists the meaning to suit the more easily defensible and righteously condemnable meaning of, "you're a bigot".

Hence, that "firestorm of indignation" says much more about the indignant, than the perceived offender.

At the end of the day, all societies are maintained by physical force. Women would still have many new roles to fill in order to live in a world without men.

All the years of telling women to be strong and independent has left them intolerant of critique. Maybe we should just spend money or write some laws that make us all equal, then everyone would finally be happy, oh wait...

Re: Battle of the sexes again

Yep, I couldn't believe my eyes when I saw this post.

The battle of the sexes has been a long-term skirmish for centuries, if not millennia. There's really no winning, but there have been some recent suggestions that women are gaining ground. It's time to fight back, men! Or not. It might be better to just nod and say, "Yes, dear..."

I mean WTF is this shit? There is a battle of the sexes going on since forever? Women and men fighting on the streets and the like? Or is the OP an idiotic MRA? I think the latter is far more likely.

Yeah there's no winning this war for the men, because they only subjugated women completely until less than a 100 years ago. But now that women are finally becoming more equal, men are losing "the war". What war? The war for the right to dominate women one presumes.